Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
as amended by mr. pilpel? >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? hearing none, next item on the agenda is the executive director's report. >> i just want to throw one thing on top of the report. during public comment earlier a number of people mentioned again the jewelle gomez case and i did call the mayor's office and to ask if it was forthcoming and said they would do so today. the first question is a response coming? the answer is no. then, that is that if it's yes, i will try to get an idea of when. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> any questions from the commissioners on the executive director's report? public comment? david pilpel and i did find the other thing on the minutes page 4 in the middle of "public comment," while i was talking about an insufficient number of commas, i would insert a comma there, to make the comment more readable. onto the executive director's report. trying to liven this up in case anybody is watching this. >> we're watching, mr. pilpel. >> we're watching, mr. pilpel. >> that is right. in connection with the november, 201
. >> that is not what the sotf ruled >> mr. shaw, please. you had your opportunity to speak. mr. pilpel you may continue. mr. shaw, please give mr. pilpel a chance to speak. thank you. >> so to conclude, i believe that those three pages should be provided. neither memo discusses what the staff's rationale for non-disclosure at the time of the original request was. that may be something that is worth discussing. so i think it goes to the question of whether there was a willful violation or a different sort of matter? i believe mr. menat shaw is free to make a request at any time, particularly now that he believes that the matter is concluded and to the extent that there are records available post a concluded investigation. there may be additional records that are now subject to disclosure. it really turns on what was available at the time a request was made? so just my final point, i am particularly troubled by the fact that apparently the commission has received either all 24 pages or at least the three pages and is able to review and consider those, which the public obviously hasn't seen,
. >> patrick again. commissioner hur and honorable commissioners, i respectfully request you ignore mr. david pilpel. as you well-know complainants start out filing a complaint. they spend endless hours waiting for their items to be scheduled and calendared and they go through a rigorous process of evaluating alleged complaints, but when the sunshine task force finishes their determination they do not title and forward to you an alleged order of determination. they send you an order of determination. don't put the word "alleged" in your title of the new proceedings. because the point the sunshine case ends up in a referral for enforcement, at ethics, it's no longer an allegation. thank you. >> on the -- with respect to the title of the ordinance, or our response to the ordinance and our handling of the ordinances, i think the titles are fine. i don't know if any other commissioners have thoughts. my view is that we do handle some sunshine complaints directly. we handle some that the task force would have made a determination on, but ultimately i think the regulations are clear and the titl
. david pilpel again. i think we're working through this issue and i appreciate your time. we have heard at least a couple of times from mr. menat shaw and we have not heard from mr. st. croix and as i suggested earlier and under the regulations that were adopted two months ago and took effect, if this matter were coming brand new know we would have had a report and recommendation from the staff and a chance for the complainant and respendent to speak. we have heard from the complainant and we have not heard from the respondent and it would help me to hear from mr. so st. croix the rationale for disclosure. so i would encourage you to ask him that. >> other questions from the commissioners? commissioner studley, you wanted to wait until there was public comment. is there anything else that you want to share is in ? >> no, i agree with you and commissioner liu. i don't find this to be willful. since the understanding -- that this was part of the investigative file and the degree to which it could have well been made with good faith and that we have teased apart this particular categor
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)